Session 9_Research-and-Innovation-in-Reading-Interventions.pptx

Research and Innovations
in Reading

1. Explain the nature, characteristics,
and process flow of action research
and innovation.
2. Recognize the value of conducting
action research and innovation in
reading interventions.
Session objectives
This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC

3. Identify the parts of an action
research manuscript and project
proposal.
4. Draft an action research capsule
proposal.
This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC

Introduction
• DepEd is mandated to undertake national
educational research studies to be used as basis
or inputs for reform and policy making (R.A. 9155
Chapter 1 Section 7 (5) Governance of Basic
Education).
• Promotion of evidenced-based policy formulation
(D.O. 13 s. 2015).

Introduction
There are two (2) RPMS objectives for proficient
and highly proficient teachers based on PPST
indicators that promote the culture of research in
reading and use its findings as evidence or basis for
innovations or improvement of learners and school
performance.

Proficient Teachers
Displayed proficient use of English to facilitate
teaching and learning.

Highly Proficient Teachers
Modelled and supported colleagues in the
proficient use of English to improve teaching and
learning as well as to develop learners’ pride of
their language , heritage and culture.

A. What makes action research in reading
interventions relevant to learners and school?
B. What is the significance of innovation in
reading interventions for learners and in
school?
Activity: Activating Prior Knowledge

Video source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOrQ-sVTuE0

Process questions:
1. What steps would you take to identify a problem or
area for improvement in your classroom using
action research?
2. How can the principles of action research be applied
to improve classroom practices and address specific
challenges you encounter with student learning?

Abstraction: Action Research (Part 1)
The main goal is
to enhance the
lives of children.
It is developing
the professional
disposition of
teachers,
encouraging them
to be continuous
learners.
It is a reflective
stance – the
willingness to
critically examine
one’s teaching in
order to improve
or enhance it.
- Davenport (2014)

Collaboration Practical
Problem
Solving
Reflective
Practice
McNiff, J. (2013)
Characteristics of Action Research

Quantitative
Research
Qualitative
Research
Type of Data
Collected
Numerical Data Nonnumerical
narrative and
visual data
Research
Problem
Hypothesis and
research procedures
stated before beginning
the study
Research problems
and methods
evolve as
understanding of
topic deepens
Overview of Qualitative and Quantitative Research
Characteristics

Quantitative
Research
Qualitative Research
Manipulation
of context
Yes No
Sample size Larger Smaller
Research
procedures
Relies on statistical
procedures
Relies on categorizing
and organizing data
into patterns to
produce a descriptive,
narrative synthesis
Characteristics

Quantitative
Research
Qualitative Research
Participant
interaction
Little interaction Extensive interaction
Underlying
belief
We live in a stable
and predictable
world that we can
measure,
understand, and
generalize about.
Meaning is situated in
a particular
perspective or context
that is different for
people and groups;
therefore, the world
has many meanings.
Characteristics

A Summary of Action Research
What? Action research
Who? Conducted by teachers and principals on
children in their care.
Where? In schools and classrooms.
Mills, 2018

How? Using a variety of research designs to match the
study’s area of focus, including qualitative
methods to describe what is happening and to
understand the effects of some educational
intervention, quantitative methods to test
hypotheses that rely on numerical analyses, and
mixed-methods designs that combine quantitative
and qualitative approaches to data collection in a
single study.
Mills, 2018

Why? To take action and effect positive educational
change in the specific school environment that
was studied.
Mills, 2018

Four-Step
Process in
Action
Research
Identify
an area
of focus
Collect
data
Analyze
and
interpre
t data
Develop
an
action
plan

Identifying Action Research Topic/Problems
What is the
situation?
Inputs
• Academic
performance
records
Process
• Problem
identification
• Development
&Implementation
of Intervention
• Collection of Post-
Intervention
Performance Data
Output
• Improve academic
performance
• Qualitative
Feedback
• Recommendations
Assumptions

Parts of the Action Research
I. Context and Rationale
II. Action Research Questions
III. Proposed Innovation, Intervention, and Strategy
IV. Action Research Methods
A. Participants and/or other Sources of Data
and Information
B. Data Gathering Methods
C. Data Analysis Plan

V. Action Research Work Plan and Timelines
VI. Cost Estimates
VII. Plans for Dissemination and Utilization
VIII. References
Parts of the Action Research
Reference: DO 16, s. 2017 Research Management Guidelines

Present and discuss a sample completed
Action Research approved in the SDO
using the template indicated in DO 16, s.
2017.

Abstraction: Innovation (Part 2)
In his piece “EdCom II and the promise of hope,” (Commentary, 3/29/23), Second
Congressional Commission on Education (EdCom II) executive director Karol Mark Yee
wrote he had come across anecdotal evidence that there are “Grade 9 and 10 students who
still cannot read or are unfamiliar with basic mathematical concepts.” Later in the article,
he said that the EdCom II sought the help of the Philippine Institute for Development
Studies (PIDS), agencies, universities, and research centers “to ensure that we are guided
by empirical data—not just anecdotal evidence.”
If presence of empirical data is a requirement of the EdCom II to act on a concern,
then there must be other reasons why, almost a year into its term, the commission has yet
to address the unimaginable phenomenon of high school illiterates. That’s because years
before the body was created, empirical evidence showing that there are nonreaders in the
secondary were already out in the open. Here are some:
The documentary “Pag-asa sa Pagbasa” aired by I-Witness, GMA 7 on Sept. 1, 2018,
featuring 29 Grade 7 nonreaders in the Sauyo High School in Novaliches, Quezon City in
school year (SY) 2018-2019.
Why is EDCOM 2 not addressing literacy crisis?
https://opinion.inquirer.net/167970/why-is-edcom-ii-not-addressing-literacy-crisis

Pre-test of the Philippine Informal Reading Inventory, reading test of the
Department of Education (DepEd), showing there were 14,289 nonreaders in the secondary
in Region 5 in SY 2019-2020.
Result of the 2018 Programme for International Student Assessment that 81
percent of our takers fell below the Pisa minimum reading proficiency level.
Given the first two evidence cited above, it is safe to assume that some of our Pisa
examinees were still unable to read although they were already in high school.
In his piece “EdCom II and the promise of hope,” (Commentary, 3/29/23), Second
Congressional Commission on Education (EdCom II) executive director Karol Mark Yee
wrote he had come across anecdotal evidence that there are “Grade 9 and 10 students who
still cannot read or are unfamiliar with basic mathematical concepts.” Later in the article,
he said that the EdCom II sought the help of the Philippine Institute for Development
Studies (PIDS), agencies, universities, and research centers “to ensure that we are guided
by empirical data—not just anecdotal evidence.”

If presence of empirical data is a requirement of the EdCom II to act on a concern,
then there must be other reasons why, almost a year into its term, the commission has yet
to address the unimaginable phenomenon of high school illiterates. That’s because years
before the body was created, empirical evidence showing that there are nonreaders in the
secondary were already out in the open. Here are some:
The documentary “Pag-asa sa Pagbasa” aired by I-Witness, GMA 7 on Sept. 1, 2018,
featuring 29 Grade 7 nonreaders in the Sauyo High School in Novaliches, Quezon City in
school year (SY) 2018-2019.
Pre-test of the Philippine Informal Reading Inventory, reading test of the
Department of Education (DepEd), showing there were 14,289 nonreaders in the secondary
in Region 5 in SY 2019-2020.
Result of the 2018 Programme for International Student Assessment that 81
percent of our takers fell below the Pisa minimum reading proficiency level.

Given the first two evidence cited above, it is safe to assume that some of our Pisa
examinees were still unable to read although they were already in high school.
In the same article, Yee wrote that the EdCom II aims to reverse the learning crisis
through “effective, data-driven policies that address the root causes of the problem.” It is
therefore concerning that up to now the EdCom II has yet to lift a finger on the shocking
issue of high school students who could not read because our Pisa results, which are
arguably our most authoritative student assessment data, clearly show that poor reading
literacy is the root cause of our learning crisis.
The results confirm the finding of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development, the entity behind the Pisa, that there is a very strong positive correlation
between reading proficiency and academic performance (“Reading for Change: Performance
and Engagement across Countries”). First, the Philippines was last in reading literacy and
was second to the last in both mathematics and science. Second, locally, the regions which
topped reading literacy were at the top of the overall standings and on the other end, the

weakest in reading literacy landed at the bottom of the overall rankings. In fact, the
National Capital Region, Region 7, and Region 4-A were top three in that order in both the
reading literacy and in overall standings, while on the other extreme, Region 9, Caraga, and
Region 12 were No. 15, No. 16 and No. 17, respectively, in both lists. (“Pisa 2018 National
Report of the Philippines,” pages 19, 31, 40).
In short, the best readers are the best students and alternatively, the worst readers
are the worst students. This means that all reforms on our basic education the EdCom II
will initiate in its entire term will not get us out of this unprecedented learning crisis and
the commission will end up as a joke if instead of fixing the reading crisis, it continues to
allow the DepEd to continue mass producing and mass promoting nonreaders all the way to
high school.
Apart from the foregoing empirical data, as early as 2019, state think tank PIDS,
which also happens to be the EdCom II’s research arm, had already found that the DepEd
is sending nonreaders to high school and had in fact, urged the agency to stop the practice

Abstraction: Innovation (Part 2)
(“Pressures on public school teachers and implications on quality”). The DepEd maintains
the practice but apparently, the EdCom II would rather fiddle while Rome burns. The
commission does not even think the jarring information we have high school illiterates is
worth looking into.

Process questions:
1. What are the challenges you encounter in the
delivery of education in your schools?
2. What do you think we should do to address
these challenges?

What is Innovation?
According to
Hattie (2009),
strategies that
related to
pedagogy,
curriculum,
management
processes, and
services.
Wagner (2012)
emphasizes
that innovation
prepare
students for
future
challenges.
Create
inclusive
environments
that support
diverse
learning styles
and abilities
(Tomlinson,
2014).
Instill
curiosity and
a desire for
continuous
improvement
(Fullan,
2013).
Promote equity
in education
(OECD, 2016).

Image source: DepEd
Order No. 39, s. 2016
Innovation
should address
gaps…

How would the absence of research
impact the effectiveness and
sustainability of innovation in
education?

• Evidence-based. Hattie (2009) emphasizes the
importance of using research to guide educational
practices, illustrating how research findings can
drive innovative approaches in education.
Relationship of Innovation and Research

• Collaboration. Vanrieken, et al. (2017) posits
collaborative research among educators can result
in innovative practices that enhance teaching and
learning.

• Continuous Improvement. Fullan (2013)
discusses the need for ongoing research and
evaluation to adapt and improve educational
innovations continuously.

Abstraction: Kinds of Innovation
Product
Marketin
g
Process Organizational
Source: OECD-Eurostat (2005), Oslo Manual: Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data, 3rd
Edition, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264013100-en.

Parts of an Innovation
I. Proponent/s
II. Implementing Entity
III. Type of Innovation
IV. Brief Description of the Proposal
A. Type
B. Project Target
C. Usage or Application
D. Significance

V. Scope of Implementation
VI. Total Funding Requirement
VII. Implementation Period
VIII. Background
IX. Rationale

X. Project Description
A. Goal
B. Outcome
C. Objective
D. Inputs
E. Expected Outputs.
F. Logical Framework
(LogFrame)

XI. Methodology
A. Method.
B. Target Beneficiary
C. Impact Estimation
D. Work and Budget Plan
E. M&E Plan
F. Exit Plan
XII. References

Implications of Innovation to School and
Learners
Teachers may lead in innovation endeavors in
school
a. Classroom level practices
b. Instructional practices (contextualization,
indigenization, localization)
c. Use and production of educational resources.

It also includes proper documentation such as:
a. Project Proposal
b. Letter of Intent
c. Presentation of result or findings in
implementing the innovation
d. Accomplishment Report

Present and discuss a sample completed
Innovation in the SDO/District/School
using the template provided in the
training package or approved
contextualized template of the SDO.

Application:
Using the data from your
needs-based school reading
intervention plan,
determine an area of interest
that you wish to address.
This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY

Application:
Draft your Action Research
or Innovation Capsule
Proposal as the Training
Program's Work Application
Project ( WAP )
This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-ND

How has the research and innovation session
contributed to your growth and development as
a teacher?
“The important thing is not to stop questioning.
Curiosity has its own reason for existing.”
— Albert Einstein

References
DepEd Order No. 44, s. 2015, "Guidelines on the Enhanced School
Improvement Planning (SIP) Process and the School Report Card
(SRC)”
DepEd Order No. 16, s. 2017 , "Research Management Guidelines”
DepEd Order No. 39, s. 2016, "Adoption of the Basic Education
Research Agenda”
DepEd Region 3, Regional Memorandum 59 s. 2017, "Reformulated
Regional Research Agenda and Call for Research”
RA 9155 "Governance of Basic Education Act of 2001

References
Burns, A. (2000). Action research and applied research: What are the relationships?
Retrievedfrom:http://language.hvper.chubu.actionresearch.ip/ialt/pub/tlt/Q0/
iu/burns.html
Davenport, C. (2014, March 3). Action Research in Education [Video].
YouTube.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOrQ-sVTuE0
Education Commission 2. (2023, August 10). High incidence of Bullying in PH public
schools alarming—EdCom 2. https://edcom2.gov.ph/high-incidence-of-bullying-in-
ph-public-schools-alarming-edcom-2/
Fullan, M. (2013). The new meaning of educational change (5th ed.). Teachers College
Press.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to
achievement. Routledge.
Mills, G. E. (2018). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher (6th ed.). Pearson.

References
OECD (2016), Innovating Education and Educating for Innovation: The Power of
Digital Technologies and Skills, OECD Publishing, Paris.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264265097-en
Qualitative Research Specialists. (2020, August 09). Action Research in
Development, Action research example. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ns7SN4_aJ0
Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of
all learners (2nd ed.). ASCD.
Wagner, T. (2012). Creating innovators: The making of young people who will
change the world. Scribner.
Vangrieken, K., Dochy, F., Raes, E., & Kyndt, E. (2017). Teacher collaboration: A
systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 29(1), 75-100.

PPT and Session Guide Writer:
Wilfredo Delos Santos
Education Program Supervisor, SDO Gapan City
DepEd Region III
PPT Template Designer/Layout Editor:
Emmanuel DG. Castro
Teacher III, HGNHS
SDO Gapan City, Region III

Session 9_Research-and-Innovation-in-Reading-Interventions.pptx

More Related Content

Similar to Session 9_Research-and-Innovation-in-Reading-Interventions.pptx

More from kristelguanzon1

Recently uploaded

Session 9_Research-and-Innovation-in-Reading-Interventions.pptx

Editor's Notes